Café de Nuit

IMC, one of the characters is a Nova Vaasan cleric of the Lawgiver (she's LN and believes that laws exist to protect the weak from anarchy, so having a PC who's a cleric of the Lawgiver isn't as unheroic as it might sound . . .). Last session, they went to Hazlan, where none of the PCs had ever been. I gave the girl playing the cleric a basic rundown of what she'd know about the church in Hazlan--they're filthy, filthy wizards who profane their bodies with tattoos, but their government is still supported by the Lawgiver's Mandate and they're the only other Lawgiver-worshipping domain in Ravenloft, so it's grudgingly accepted.

Upon going to Hazlan, the cleric was absolutely horrified to learn that the magic was abused much more than she'd ever imagined, and was particularly shocked by its use in unnatural experiments (the creation of krenshar and tentacle rats, the Tables, and all that other fun stuff). She immediately started writing a letter to her biskop alerting him of exactly how perverse these Hazlani were and urging him to alert the aerkebiskop, who could alert the pave, who could alert the Himmelsk Naeve to withdraw the Lawgiver's Mandate--or at least to demand that Hazlan's Pave do something to stem this unnatural use of magic.

Which made me wonder: why hasn't this already happened? We know from Gaz V that there's a potential schism looming on the horizon. Why haven't they schismed already? Why hasn't the Himmelsk Naeve withdrawn the Mandate or demanded that the Pave stop profaning the name of the Lawgiver by associating it with arcane magic? Obviously the Hazlani don't do it because they're afraid of Hazlik, but I'm not sure why that would stop the Nova Vaasans from stepping in--not withdrawing the Mandate from Hazlik sounds suspiciously like compromise, which is something that the Church of the Lawgiver isn't exactly known for.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I really have no idea whether her biskop should react with outrage or with some kind of "we've known about this for decades, this is why it doesn't matter, now shut up until you can bring me something important" statement.

Who is going to the tables? Well those terrible anarchists and evil terrorists, n'est-ce pas? And that is only a somewhat more horrible 'end' than being whipped to death or dragged behind horses to death in Nova Vaasa. Further, isn't disfigurement, at least by the Lawgiver himself, proof of sin?

By all means arcane magic is associated with the evil chaos of Myterri. But the particular ends being achieved with it in Hazlan are not very shocking, frankly, to a church sworn to dominion by the whip. The woman should look a little harder at non-magical practice back home. Send her to talk to the reform branch in Arborea if she wants to open her eyes.

As to magic itself, is it better to lose all of the Hazlani followers in a schism or is it better to work grudgingly towards the day when they finally and fully embrace the light and renounce the arcane completely? Which solution yields more influence and more power to the head of the faith?

The woman will do well to escape a whipping, at a minimum, from the archbishop for her self-important meddling.

Additionally, the letter may fall into the hands of the pave of Nova Vaasa who would not be pleased, regardless of his personal sympathies, and a member of the order of the Teachers may be dispatched to discuss the woman's worrying sympathies for anarchists and terrorists. Indeed, a stint helping to exact information from, and to re-educate, heretics may be proposed. That should do wonders for her lawful neutral alignment and attract the favour of the Dark Powers.

Oh yes, the rats, they came from Markovia via Nova Vaasa. The bill for their extermination is being forwarded to Othmar Boshnik. With such poor border control no wonder prized Vaasan stallions keep finding their way into Hazlan.

Now, if she does want to get upset about something and to do something about it, the sect proclaiming the Lawgiver dead could be whipped into silence once and for all. Or maybe just their tongues ripped out . . .

The answer's in Gaz I, page 51, Hazlan's attitude toward magic. Breifly, when Hazlik outlawed any magic but his own, everything was fine. Hazlik was a "divinely ordained exception" (makes sense: if magic is outlawed to prevent anarchy, then it must be ok for the ruler to weild it, since he can't be an anarchist by definition).

It's only been since Hazlik reversed his decree (after the Upheaval) that the schism has started. The reason it hasn't fully come to a repeal of mandate yet is that: "The dogma of the lawgiver claims that hazlik received a divine revelation when the lawgiver returned following the great upheavel. only the red wizard knows the exact nature of the revelation, but most of the lawgivers's faithful believe that arcane magic witll somwhow be crucial in preventing future catastrophes." So that's the official line the biskop will feed her....

EDIT: although I see cure has some good ideas too.

gonzoron wrote:The answer's in Gaz I, page 51, Hazlan's attitude toward magic. Breifly, when Hazlik outlawed any magic but his own, everything was fine. Hazlik was a "divinely ordained exception" (makes sense: if magic is outlawed to prevent anarchy, then it must be ok for the ruler to weild it, since he can't be an anarchist by definition).

D'oh . . . there it is in my Gaz. I can't believe I overlooked that entirely. Whoops. Thanks, all.

(Incidentally, cure, she had no problem whatsoever with the fact that it was rebellious types getting shipped off to the Tables, just that magic was the chosen instrument of torture. Heck, she was more disturbed by the mutated animals that they ran into than the Tables. But you have some very interesting ideas there . . . )